The Hecht et al. application describes recording formats for self-clocking glyph codes which spatially reference the "data glyphs" (i.e., the glyphs that encode user data) to sync glyphs (i.e., additional glyphs that spatially synchronize the glyph reading process). To this end, the data glyphs and the sync glyphs are written onto a recording medium in accordance with a predetermined spatial formatting rule, thereby recording a "glyph pattern." Furthermore, the sync glyphs are spatially distributed within this glyph pattern in accordance with a preselected spatial distribution rule, so the positioning of the sync glyphs is constrained to comply with a predefined geometric subpattern.
To provide a visually homogeneous glyph pattern, the sync glyphs are visually indistinguishable from the data glyphs. Indeed, all of the glyphs typically are defined by symbols from the same symbol set, such as slash-like symbols that are tilted from vertical at approximately +45.degree. and -45.degree. to encode binary "0's" and "1's", respectively.
However, in keeping with the teachings of the Hecht et al. application, the sync glyphs encode successive bits of a predetermined "sync code sequence," such that the logical ordering of the bits of the sync code sequence is preserved by the spatial ordering of the sync glyphs that encode them. Thus, to identify these sync glyphs, the decode values of glyphs that are distributed spatially in the glyph pattern in close conformity to the known sync glyph subpattern are examined. This examination is performed on successive sets of glyphs until a sufficiently large number of glyphs with decode values which substantially correlate with the known sync code sequence is found (in practice, this correlation process may tolerate a small number of correlation errors). The goal is to establish that the correlation exists over a sufficiently large number of glyphs to confirm to a suitably high probability that those particular glyphs are sync glyphs. Additional sync glyphs then are identified by extending the examination of the glyph decode values in accordance with the known sync glyph subpattern and with the rules that govern the mapping of glyph decode values into memory.
As a general rule, the sync glyph subpattern is composed of one or more linear arrays of sync glyphs. Intersecting linear arrays of sync glyphs are attractive because they can be employed for spatially synchronizing the glyph read/decode process in two dimensions (e.g., along both the x-axis and the y-axis in standard orthogonal coordinates). Often, a lattice-like sync glyph flamework is favored because it not only provide adequate spatial references for spatially synchronizing the glyph read process in two dimensions, but also provides multiple paths for navigating via the sync lattice from any one sync glyph to any other, thereby enabling spatial synchronization recovery in the presence of localized damage and/or distortion to the glyph pattern.
A "glyph" is an "embedded data character," which is defined as being a two dimensional image symbology that has at least two graphical states for encoding the logical states ("1" and "0") of a single bit. An "embedded data block" (EDB) in turn, is two dimensional image symbology for the storage and retrieval of data, EDBs are composed of embedded data characters; some of which are encoded to define a synchronization frame and others of which are encoded to carry user/application-specific information. The synchronization frame (sometimes referred to as a "glyph sync subpattern") and the user information are the two major structural components of an EDB. It will be seen however, that the composition of an EDB may be extended to comprise additional components, including both implicit logical structure and explicit graphical structure for transferring information pertaining to the structural or logical composition of the EDB from the composer of the EDB to the reader/decoder. A "glyph pattern" is an instance of an EDB.